REVIEW 2 cited by
GPTCoach: Towards LLM-Based Physical Activity Coaching
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Mobile health applications show promise for scalable physical activity promotion but are often insufficiently personalized. In contrast, health coaching offers highly personalized support but can be prohibitively expensive and inaccessible. This study draws inspiration from health coaching to explore how large language models (LLMs) might address personalization challenges in mobile health. We conduct formative interviews with 12 health professionals and 10 potential coaching recipients to develop design principles for an LLM-based health coach. We then built GPTCoach, a chatbot that implements the onboarding conversation from an evidence-based coaching program, uses conversational strategies from motivational interviewing, and incorporates wearable data to create personalized physical activity plans. In a lab study with 16 participants using three months of historical data, we find promising evidence that GPTCoach gathers rich qualitative information to offer personalized support, with users feeling comfortable sharing concerns. We conclude with implications for future research on LLM-based physical activity support.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
DuetML: Human-LLM Collaborative Machine Learning Framework for Non-Expert Users
DuetML adds multimodal LLM agents, one reactive and one proactive, to an interactive machine learning interface, and a small user study found outside evaluators rated its users' category definitions as more aligned wi...
-
AI, Jobs, and the Automation Trap: Where Is HCI?
A position paper claiming AI patents overwhelmingly favor task automation over human augmentation, and proposing incentive changes to make human-centered AI more impactful.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.